HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
David Babson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 20 Oct 2005 00:48:28 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (41 lines)
Well said.

D. Babson.
 

-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ron
May
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 8:26 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: excavation justification

Bill,

None of those records you described can address the kind of questions we
ask
about behaviors within the household or in the greater community.
Moreover,
historical records often fail to identify social behaviors concerning
dietary
practices, consumer selection, or many of the very personal things found
in
their privies and trash dumps. The California State Historic
Preservation
Officer wrote off the Ballast Point Whaling Station in 1989 simply
because a
National Park Service historian made the very point you just did without
any
archaeological testing. My 1988-1989 and 1991-1992 investigations
revealed a
Chinese fishing camp, whaling station, and industrial workshops that are
simply
not recorded in the historical record except in the vaguest terms. After
I
publish my current report, I intend to request reconsideration of the
SHPO
finding of ineligibility.

Ron May
Legacy 106, Inc.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2